Grading Teachers

So several news stories have come up recently on the issues of teacher accountability.

First, teachers here in Oregon in the Oregon Trail School District (Sandy and others towns) were on strike. From what I understand, the sticking points were not so much pay and benefits, but rather how much control the district can have to transfer teachers who aren't doing well. The strike was 3 weeks before a settlement, and rather ulgy.

Second, one of the failed ballot measures in California pushed by their governer was to have teachers stay on probation for 5 years until they can be tenured.

Both of these seem to be about the issue of grading teachers. How do we (as a society) make sure that the teachers are good?

This is soooo not as simple as keeping a teacher on probation. Or having the right to transfer teachers. This comes down to what makes a good teacher. How do we define that? Then, once we have defined that, how do we make sure that our teachers are that?

So what makes a good teacher?

Is it the test scores that your students get in a similar test to students at other schools?

What if you teach a subject that can't really be tested en masse? (Like social studies in my opinion)
The highest indicator of how well students test is the income and education levels of their parents (according to all those studies that I had to read in teacher school). So are teachers of those students who test well in areas with large amounts of certain kinds of students really good or really bad or ineffectual?

So if it's not test scores - maybe it's how well students do on an assignment, like an essay on World War II compared to others.

To use an economic term: students are not widgets. I remember running into some former students several years ago at a store. They had complained to me so much in school about writing an essay, making a thesis, backing it up with evidence, doing drafts, etc. They did lousy. But they told me after a couple of years off and then going back to school, that they understood now what I was getting at back then. But since they didn't do it then, it wouldn't count.

So still, what is it? How quiet the class is? How involved? How do you rate involvement? Is it the relationship between teachers and students?

The public, for good reasons, would like to know what teachers are doing in the classrooms. But it's not so much a secret, as really hard to describe in a sound bite.

The method that we have had for evaluating teachers was that adminstrators come in and watch your class. They are supposed to meet with you beforehand, let you know they are coming for 2 times, have a surprise visit, and meet with you afterwards to discuss how you did. The state law used to be that it happened every 3 years, now it happens every 2.

Now in theory I love that model. I enjoy having the administrators see what I am doing, I want them to get an idea of what my class does and of course the more administrators are in the classroom instead of meetings I think is good. However, the requirement for evaluating teachers every 2 years happened at the same time as massive budget cuts here in Portland Public Schools. Schools have gone from 7 administrators to 3. Evaluations are often brushed aside for fights, meetings, emegencies, etc.

So we are left with the quick and dirty check up on teachers: how did they do on the test? How many refferals did they have? How many complaints?

Are there bad teachers? Yes. No one wishes more than I that we could make sure that all teachers are fabulous. But the solutions that the Oregon Trail school district and Governer Schwarzenegger were not the right answer either.